Skip to main content

An elimination play with loser on loser

This deal happened in last second qualifying in the National Women's Bridge League Cup, 2018, the highest level women's bridge competition in China.

Board 5
Vul: NS
Dealer: North

North     East     South     West
 Pass       Pass      1♢          4♣
    X         Pass      4♠          AP

Lead: ♣A



Trick      North   East    South    West
   1            ♣T      ♣6       ♣9          ♣A
   2            ♡T      ♡A       ♡6          ♡3
   3            ♢A      ♢T       ♢2          ♢K

West leads the ♣A and then shifts to ♡3. East wins with the ♡A and returns ♢T! Quite amazing shift... How to play now?

4♣ shows West holds 8 clubs. After drawing 3 round trumps, West discards 2 clubs. It is obvious that West might be 1-3-1-8 or 1-2-2-8. After running ♡, West follows 2 small ♡ which exposed all the distribution. 1-3-1-8 for West. Now the endplay becomes interesting. Assuming that ♢3 is played from the table, the contract is icy. If East follows 9 or 6(they are the same), the declarer could win with the ♢J and throw ♣Q to West, discarding a small ♢ on table(loser on loser). West has to return ♣ only. If East wins with the ♢Q, ♢9 will be finessed in next turn and ruffing ♣Q will be the entry to table. That's why ♢3 must be played rather than ♢8 and why not eliminating the ♣ just eliminating trump and heart only. East follows ♢6 carefully on the table, saying whatever you do the contract will down one...

The full deal
Board 5
Vul: NS
Dealer: North

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NOTICE: Suspension of publication

Dear readers:     For some personal reasons, I am sorry that the blogger would not be updated for a long time, at least one month. Thank you for your understanding. Best Wishes!                                                                                                  X. Li                                                                                             2018.9.30                                    ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Online training: An unexpected but reasonable ducking

HAHAHA, after one month off bridge, I'm back!!! This deal happened in our weekly online training, Nov 5th, 2018. First of all, I have to admit my mistake. Hahaha, to be honest, the training was quite boring. After 12 boards, the scores were still 2:2. Although I knew X was not allowed and I would be fined if 3♣X was brought home, I still couldn't help to doing that. Board 13 Dealer: North Vul: Both North    East    South    West  Pass     Pass      1♢         2♢*   2♡*      2♠       Pass       Pass   3♣         X         AP 2♢: Michael 2♡: ♣ suit, better than 3♣ Lead: ♡3 (if hasn't raised, count has a priority. That is to say, xxx lead the smallest card) Table followed ♡9. Normally, you would play ♡Q causally. Would it be correct in this case? Leading analysis: Eas...
Post a Comment
Read more

Interactive Hand Testing

Fu Bo shared this deal with me. This deal happened in the open pair qualify of the 15th Would Bridge Series. She asked me could you find out the defense even if you saw 4 hands. Interactive hand analysis was interesting and played an important role in improving bridge technique. Although double-dummy analysis always stood on a God view, it was essential in a post-mortem analysis. This was first time to show a interactive hand analysis here. I'd appreciate if you could share any interesting double-dummy with me. How to defend 4♠? In this case, defenders should prevent declarer from ruffing ♣ or from winning 3♢. How to cut the connection between table and hand became a serious problem. Timing and speed were the crucial point. 1. Leading ♣     A slow step, losing an upper hand. Declarer could win with the ♣A and sent out small ♣. Even if the defender shift to trump, the declarer was a step ahead. (a) Returning small trump, won by North, ruffing a small ♣ and finessing ...
Post a Comment
Read more